[EN]On Diplomacy - part 1
Day 931, 00:55
•
Published in Romania 
•
by
•
by mihail.cazacu
[RO] Acesta e un serial dedicat celor care vor sa se apuce de diplomatie in eRepublik. Intrucat majoritatea comunicatiei diplomatice se face in engleza am hotarat sa scriu articolul in aceasta limba.
Diplomacy needs farsighted people. Thus a telescopic sight is highly recommended
Diplomacy is an important part of eRepublik even though only a very small part of it is coded in the game mechanics. The game-mechanics illustrations of diplomacy are the MPPs, the Training Wars, the land-swaps, some of the attacks and some of the RWs.
What we can see through game mechanics is just the tip of the iceberg. The bigger part is invisible to the general public. And because it is invisible it is hard for us to learn it by example. This is too bad because diplomacy makes this game richer and more enjoyable.
The basics
What is diplomacy?
The in-game working definition is similar to the Real Life one:
Diplomacy is the set of actions performed in order to achieve a country's national goals through international negotiations.
The main challenges faced by an in-game diplomat are similar to those faced by a Real Life one:
First we need to understand what our National Goals really are.
Idiotic National Goals would lead us nowhere in-game just like in Real Life.
The most important prerequisite of a good diplomacy is good quality National Goals.
Just because a president sets a National Goal does not make it a goal worth pursuing. Good quality National Goals are independent of the governments, just like in Real Life.
Actually this is the first test of a good National Goal: if it's independent of the government then chances are it's a good one.
The beauty (or the irony) of the situation is National Goals are not legitimated by the guys who set them. Not even by the popular vote. It's just like the relation between democracy and mathematics: even if the entire population votes 1 + 1 = 3 that does not make it true.
What makes a good National Goal is independent on the person who sets it and completely dependent on the fundamentals of the system of international relations. And because the real fundamentals don't change much over time good quality National Goals are also invariable.
The Congress of Vienna 1815 - the Big Guys tried to play it nice. It worked. For a while
In order to illustrate this I will make the following apparently crazy statement:
The fundamentals of RL international relations haven't changed since the Stone Age.
In truth there's no diplomacy independent of the human beings (there was no diplomacy among the dinosaurs and there is none among the bacterias). And the human beings' fundamental needs haven't changed since the Stone Age.
What changed was how the communities of the human beings were organized and the technology they used.
At any given point in time the needs of some community exceeded the resources available to that community. When that happened there were only 2 possible courses of action: to take by force the resources from some other community or to negotiate an agreement about sharing the resources. The first approach was the responsibility of the military, the second was the job of the diplomats.
One kick is worth 1000 words
The military approach was the fastest to yield results but also the riskiest. And it worked well until the development of that community reached the empire stage. At that point an empire bumped into another empire. Expansion stopped. The balance of forces became so delicate the first empire to make an apparently minor mistake would crumble.
That is why in 1815 the European nations including France agreed to set up a system of solving by negotiations whatever disputes might arise among the Great Powers.
The System worked for about 40 years. During those years the Great Powers froze their expansion in Europe and did their empire-building elsewhere. Till of course the inevitable happened again and they bumped into each other. This time in Asia.
What had already happened to the Romans and the Parthians some 12 centuries before in the Middle East happened to Russia and Britain in Central Asia.
[img]http://www.intellibible.com/wp-content/uploads/SLIDE013.JPG[/img]
The Roman and Parthian empires bumped into each other in the Middle East
The Romans and the Parthians had nowhere else to expand so they grinded each other until both crumbled. Twice. First the Roman and Parthian empires, then their successors the Byzantines and the Sassanids.
The Byzantines and the Sassanids proved marginally smarter than their Roman and Parthian predecessors - they managed to negotiate a "Treaty of Eternal Peace" which lasted for...17 years
In the mid 19th century the situation looked slightly different. But as we know looks can be deceiving. And they were.
It looked like while Britain was indeed blocked, Russia could still expand on the expense of the Ottoman and Austrian empires. Throw into the mix an emerging Germany right in the center of Europe and we end up with the spectacular chain of events which went from the Crimean war to the French-Prussian war to WW1, to WW2 and finally the Cold War.
Could we have had an equivalent of the EU right after Waterloo? We could and we were quite close to building it. Heck, we could have had it even earlier, when the Byzantines and the Sassanids signed the "Treaty of Eternal Peace" (in 532 AD!!!)
The fundamentals of the situation didn't change from Stone Age to 532 AD to 1815 AD to nowadays. People could have continued to kill each other for resources. Or they could have negotiated a smart way to share them. Like they did!
But then didn't stick to the idea of negotiating. Probably because the military way looked easier. And as I said (and history proved time and again), looks can be deceiving.
What worked in 532 AD for 17 years worked again in 1815 for 41 years. It also works with the EU for like 60 years. Lass muscle flexing and more talking seems to do the trick.
With such a long track record we can safely conclude the Real Life fundamentals of diplomacy are indeed timeless.
Military might is a solid bargaining chip in eRepublik - just like in Real Life
What about the fundamentals of eRepublik?
- unlike Real Life where communities need peaceful agreements over resource-sharing in order to thrive eRepublik communities need constant wars. The game mechanics of eRepublik make the economies collapse if wars don't happen.
- In addition to that the players abandon the game if nothing interesting happens. While RL wars destroy communities, eRepublik wars consolidate them or even make them grow through baby-booms.
What are the truly valuable resources of eRepublik?
The truly valuable resources are those who help a community grow. In eRepublik communities grow by two means:
1. bringing people to the game;
2. keeping them in the game.
Does high iron, high wood, high diamonds or high whatever have anything to do with bringing people to the game and keeping them there?!
Did the Poles join the game in huge numbers because they wanted to take Rhone-Alps?
Did the Hungarians join the game because they wanted Heilongjiang?
Did the Serbs join the game for Liaoning?
The Polish "demotivator" which triggered the Polish Mega Baby-Boom. No trace of Rhone-Alps but Brandenburg is there
Nobody joins this game for some high resources regions on the other side of the world, situated in provinces with names nobody except the natives have ever heard about.
Most of the people join the game in order to kick the butt of their Real Life rivals. Most of the people stay in-game as long as the wars against the Real Life rivals keep going on.
This is why the Romanians lost less players when their Asian Empire crumbled - they've lost the Empire but they kept the wars with Hungary and Russia. Even the non-combat mode which followed didn't manage to kill more than 10 - 15% of the players.
For Romania the most severe loss of population happened during the Cold War which followed the eviction of Russia from North America. After Russia (a second source of baby-boom for Romania, after Hungary) was kicked out only the mobile forces kept fighting Hungary in Manitoba, Nunavut or Alaska. The majority of the players stayed at home and got bored with the Training Wars. So they started leaving.
Luckily for us Hungary invaded Romania at New Year's even and that brought 4000 new players to the game. Then the "Operation World in Flames" aka the Croatian-Romanian attack on Hungary kept them interested in the game. So right Romania has more players than when she was ruling over half of the eWorld.
When a good war is worth more than 1000 high regions
Lack of truly motivating wars is the reason why Poland started to lose players at an alarming rate right at the zenith of her Empire: people had came to the game to kick German butt (and Russian butt). Not French or Brazilian one.
"Let's conquer Lyon" (Rhone-Alps) makes no Polish heart beat faster. "Let's get Berlin" or "Let's parade our winged hussars through Moscow" are the real motivators.
High iron or high titanium regions are secondary targets. The everlasting sets of National Goals in eRepublik are those who help communities to grow. And that is permanent wars with the RL rivals.
The in-game diplomats are responsible for the growth of their communities. Therefore whatever they do must first and foremost ensure there will be always wars with the RL rivals.
That translates in the following more specific objectives for the diplomats in eRepublik:
1. That they befriend the nations who are RL rivals of their RL rivals;
That one is pretty obvious. What we need is the right tools for the job.
2. They make sure their nation's objectives are aligned with the objectives of the allies.
The most important principle when aligning objectives is "I scratch your back and you scratch mine".
It is often easy for an ally to forget our nation needs fun too.
There are often cases when the allies get hold of some colonies which they can't defend by themselves (nobody can).
Once they get hold of those colonies they paralyze the whole alliance in a defensive stance.
Our allies can threaten to leave the alliance or even to RW our own colony if we fail to defend their newly acquired high region. They can even negotiate secret deals with the enemies in order to keep those colonies for another month or two.
Such strange behaviors happen sometimes because of the fundamental failure to understand the main resource of eRepublik, the one which brings players to the game and keeps them in the game is an interesting war, not high iron/wood/diamonds.
The reverse is true as well: as experienced diplomats we need to explain to our own governments that forcing everybody else in our alliance to neglect their own fun is the best way to lose friends.
In order to allow to keep one colony or another we can destroy in a single day of trolling what was build over several months of cooperation and negotiation.
We can't have interesting wars without the help of our allies. They can't have interesting wars without our help.
High regions come and go. Interesting wars can last forever (just look at the Atlantis-PEACE war which became the EDEN-Phoenix war if any proof is needed). It's our duty as diplomats to make sure everybody understands that (including sometimes our own governments and the public opinion at home) .
The last important duty of the in-game diplomats is:
3. That they troll the hell out of the RL rivals, in order to make sure in-game peace never happens.
Peace with RL rivals kills the baby booms and makes the players leave. In-game peace destroys the in-game communities and in-game economy just like RL war destroys the RL communities and the RL economic infrastructure (factories get bombed, railways get blown up, power plants get flattened).
In the next articles of the series I will discuss in depth what means we have in order to fulfill our duties.
So stay tuned and enjoy the game!
Diplomacy needs farsighted people. Thus a telescopic sight is highly recommended
Diplomacy is an important part of eRepublik even though only a very small part of it is coded in the game mechanics. The game-mechanics illustrations of diplomacy are the MPPs, the Training Wars, the land-swaps, some of the attacks and some of the RWs.
What we can see through game mechanics is just the tip of the iceberg. The bigger part is invisible to the general public. And because it is invisible it is hard for us to learn it by example. This is too bad because diplomacy makes this game richer and more enjoyable.
The basics
What is diplomacy?
The in-game working definition is similar to the Real Life one:
Diplomacy is the set of actions performed in order to achieve a country's national goals through international negotiations.
The main challenges faced by an in-game diplomat are similar to those faced by a Real Life one:
First we need to understand what our National Goals really are.
Idiotic National Goals would lead us nowhere in-game just like in Real Life.
The most important prerequisite of a good diplomacy is good quality National Goals.
Just because a president sets a National Goal does not make it a goal worth pursuing. Good quality National Goals are independent of the governments, just like in Real Life.
Actually this is the first test of a good National Goal: if it's independent of the government then chances are it's a good one.
The beauty (or the irony) of the situation is National Goals are not legitimated by the guys who set them. Not even by the popular vote. It's just like the relation between democracy and mathematics: even if the entire population votes 1 + 1 = 3 that does not make it true.
What makes a good National Goal is independent on the person who sets it and completely dependent on the fundamentals of the system of international relations. And because the real fundamentals don't change much over time good quality National Goals are also invariable.
The Congress of Vienna 1815 - the Big Guys tried to play it nice. It worked. For a while
In order to illustrate this I will make the following apparently crazy statement:
The fundamentals of RL international relations haven't changed since the Stone Age.
In truth there's no diplomacy independent of the human beings (there was no diplomacy among the dinosaurs and there is none among the bacterias). And the human beings' fundamental needs haven't changed since the Stone Age.
What changed was how the communities of the human beings were organized and the technology they used.
At any given point in time the needs of some community exceeded the resources available to that community. When that happened there were only 2 possible courses of action: to take by force the resources from some other community or to negotiate an agreement about sharing the resources. The first approach was the responsibility of the military, the second was the job of the diplomats.
One kick is worth 1000 words
The military approach was the fastest to yield results but also the riskiest. And it worked well until the development of that community reached the empire stage. At that point an empire bumped into another empire. Expansion stopped. The balance of forces became so delicate the first empire to make an apparently minor mistake would crumble.
That is why in 1815 the European nations including France agreed to set up a system of solving by negotiations whatever disputes might arise among the Great Powers.
The System worked for about 40 years. During those years the Great Powers froze their expansion in Europe and did their empire-building elsewhere. Till of course the inevitable happened again and they bumped into each other. This time in Asia.
What had already happened to the Romans and the Parthians some 12 centuries before in the Middle East happened to Russia and Britain in Central Asia.
[img]http://www.intellibible.com/wp-content/uploads/SLIDE013.JPG[/img]
The Roman and Parthian empires bumped into each other in the Middle East
The Romans and the Parthians had nowhere else to expand so they grinded each other until both crumbled. Twice. First the Roman and Parthian empires, then their successors the Byzantines and the Sassanids.
The Byzantines and the Sassanids proved marginally smarter than their Roman and Parthian predecessors - they managed to negotiate a "Treaty of Eternal Peace" which lasted for...17 years
In the mid 19th century the situation looked slightly different. But as we know looks can be deceiving. And they were.
It looked like while Britain was indeed blocked, Russia could still expand on the expense of the Ottoman and Austrian empires. Throw into the mix an emerging Germany right in the center of Europe and we end up with the spectacular chain of events which went from the Crimean war to the French-Prussian war to WW1, to WW2 and finally the Cold War.
Could we have had an equivalent of the EU right after Waterloo? We could and we were quite close to building it. Heck, we could have had it even earlier, when the Byzantines and the Sassanids signed the "Treaty of Eternal Peace" (in 532 AD!!!)
The fundamentals of the situation didn't change from Stone Age to 532 AD to 1815 AD to nowadays. People could have continued to kill each other for resources. Or they could have negotiated a smart way to share them. Like they did!
But then didn't stick to the idea of negotiating. Probably because the military way looked easier. And as I said (and history proved time and again), looks can be deceiving.
What worked in 532 AD for 17 years worked again in 1815 for 41 years. It also works with the EU for like 60 years. Lass muscle flexing and more talking seems to do the trick.
With such a long track record we can safely conclude the Real Life fundamentals of diplomacy are indeed timeless.
Military might is a solid bargaining chip in eRepublik - just like in Real Life
What about the fundamentals of eRepublik?
- unlike Real Life where communities need peaceful agreements over resource-sharing in order to thrive eRepublik communities need constant wars. The game mechanics of eRepublik make the economies collapse if wars don't happen.
- In addition to that the players abandon the game if nothing interesting happens. While RL wars destroy communities, eRepublik wars consolidate them or even make them grow through baby-booms.
What are the truly valuable resources of eRepublik?
The truly valuable resources are those who help a community grow. In eRepublik communities grow by two means:
1. bringing people to the game;
2. keeping them in the game.
Does high iron, high wood, high diamonds or high whatever have anything to do with bringing people to the game and keeping them there?!
Did the Poles join the game in huge numbers because they wanted to take Rhone-Alps?
Did the Hungarians join the game because they wanted Heilongjiang?
Did the Serbs join the game for Liaoning?
The Polish "demotivator" which triggered the Polish Mega Baby-Boom. No trace of Rhone-Alps but Brandenburg is there
Nobody joins this game for some high resources regions on the other side of the world, situated in provinces with names nobody except the natives have ever heard about.
Most of the people join the game in order to kick the butt of their Real Life rivals. Most of the people stay in-game as long as the wars against the Real Life rivals keep going on.
This is why the Romanians lost less players when their Asian Empire crumbled - they've lost the Empire but they kept the wars with Hungary and Russia. Even the non-combat mode which followed didn't manage to kill more than 10 - 15% of the players.
For Romania the most severe loss of population happened during the Cold War which followed the eviction of Russia from North America. After Russia (a second source of baby-boom for Romania, after Hungary) was kicked out only the mobile forces kept fighting Hungary in Manitoba, Nunavut or Alaska. The majority of the players stayed at home and got bored with the Training Wars. So they started leaving.
Luckily for us Hungary invaded Romania at New Year's even and that brought 4000 new players to the game. Then the "Operation World in Flames" aka the Croatian-Romanian attack on Hungary kept them interested in the game. So right Romania has more players than when she was ruling over half of the eWorld.
When a good war is worth more than 1000 high regions
Lack of truly motivating wars is the reason why Poland started to lose players at an alarming rate right at the zenith of her Empire: people had came to the game to kick German butt (and Russian butt). Not French or Brazilian one.
"Let's conquer Lyon" (Rhone-Alps) makes no Polish heart beat faster. "Let's get Berlin" or "Let's parade our winged hussars through Moscow" are the real motivators.
High iron or high titanium regions are secondary targets. The everlasting sets of National Goals in eRepublik are those who help communities to grow. And that is permanent wars with the RL rivals.
The in-game diplomats are responsible for the growth of their communities. Therefore whatever they do must first and foremost ensure there will be always wars with the RL rivals.
That translates in the following more specific objectives for the diplomats in eRepublik:
1. That they befriend the nations who are RL rivals of their RL rivals;
That one is pretty obvious. What we need is the right tools for the job.
2. They make sure their nation's objectives are aligned with the objectives of the allies.
The most important principle when aligning objectives is "I scratch your back and you scratch mine".
It is often easy for an ally to forget our nation needs fun too.
There are often cases when the allies get hold of some colonies which they can't defend by themselves (nobody can).
Once they get hold of those colonies they paralyze the whole alliance in a defensive stance.
Our allies can threaten to leave the alliance or even to RW our own colony if we fail to defend their newly acquired high region. They can even negotiate secret deals with the enemies in order to keep those colonies for another month or two.
Such strange behaviors happen sometimes because of the fundamental failure to understand the main resource of eRepublik, the one which brings players to the game and keeps them in the game is an interesting war, not high iron/wood/diamonds.
The reverse is true as well: as experienced diplomats we need to explain to our own governments that forcing everybody else in our alliance to neglect their own fun is the best way to lose friends.
In order to allow to keep one colony or another we can destroy in a single day of trolling what was build over several months of cooperation and negotiation.
We can't have interesting wars without the help of our allies. They can't have interesting wars without our help.
High regions come and go. Interesting wars can last forever (just look at the Atlantis-PEACE war which became the EDEN-Phoenix war if any proof is needed). It's our duty as diplomats to make sure everybody understands that (including sometimes our own governments and the public opinion at home) .
The last important duty of the in-game diplomats is:
3. That they troll the hell out of the RL rivals, in order to make sure in-game peace never happens.
Peace with RL rivals kills the baby booms and makes the players leave. In-game peace destroys the in-game communities and in-game economy just like RL war destroys the RL communities and the RL economic infrastructure (factories get bombed, railways get blown up, power plants get flattened).
In the next articles of the series I will discuss in depth what means we have in order to fulfill our duties.
So stay tuned and enjoy the game!
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
propaganda
Ernst von Jacob,
yeah!
real one 😃
"The most important principle when aligning objectives is "I scratch your back and you scratch mine". "
100% accurate 🙂
v
NICE, great job, pacat ca nu am timp sa-l citesc integral, dar votat si o sa-l citesc deseara.
You, Kozak Misi, can't figure out why on Earth a RL Moldavian citizen of Romanian ancestry would show loyalty to his home country (Moldavia) in game (and in Real Life).
@Zoli: Could it be because the Republic of Moldova is by accident and only for a short while separated from Romania?
Could it also be that the Republic of Moldova was on the receiving end of a foreign invasion followed by a ruthless and savage colonization of an alien population, just like the whole Carpathian basin in the 9th century?
Good article v+s
wow, am citit tot 🙂
You, Kozak Misi, can't figure out why on Earth a RL Moldavian citizen of Romanian ancestry would show loyalty to his home country (Moldavia) in game (and in Real Life). x2
it doesn't matter for when the people stay there. It's their homeland, afterall. And it is not YOURS.
@Misi - could it be that in certain regions of Erdely the percentage of Hungarians is higher then that of Moldavians in Moldavia. So what is the difference. Could it be that all major cities of Erdely underwent a savage and ruthless colonization?
It's just a matter of perspective so take out you head from your back side.
uita unu cu capu pa umeri in plm.... evident ca orice imperiu pica.... frtmiu... 😐.... stim istorie stim si ca in trecut s-au folosit niste stimulente de succes pt asta.... from inside out... da faza-i ca in prezent sunt ingrozitor de multi factori de luat in seama.... se pot face multe da controlul tra sa fie strict.... controlul marjei de eroare.... in primu rand.... ca acolo se joaca adevaratu joc.... acolo e buba particulelor exotice....
@Zoli + gyika:
Diferentele sunt fundamentale, nebunaticelor:
Nnoi am stat pe loc, ailalti au venit calare pe cal sau pe tanc. Si tot n-au reusit sa schimbe fundamental structura populatiei. Au facut doar niste enclave mititele in care s-au adunat ei intre ei.
De la Nistru pana la Tisa
Kozak Misi plansu-mi-s-a.
@gyika: ORLY? Care din noi e in Legiunea Secuiasca?
//balacareala mode OFF
@gyika - "😉e la Nistru pana la Tisa, Kozak Misi plansu-mi-s-a." Lasand la o parte divergentele pe care le ai tu cu Mihai, si romanii cu ungurii in acest joc, da-mi voie sa-ti zic atat: RESPECT! Respect pt modul cum scrii in limba romana. Daca ar sti sa scrie la fel de bine macar 50% dintre romani, am fi in acest moment muuult mai departe ca nivel de civilizatie. As vrea sa vad in primul rand pe acele specimene ce se dau mari patrioti ca reusesc sa scrie ca tine.
//balacareala mode ON
DDanica +1 🙂
Fain articol, insa cred ca pui totusi prea mare accent pe rivalitatile din RL. Da, un razboi intre doua tari "cu istorie" in RL are sanse f mari sa duca la un BB, insa pentru a tine lumea interesata eu zic ca tot ce trebuie e un scop real si valoros.
Daca e sa luam exemplul Romaniei... o campanie de ajungere in Asia pentru a prinde o regiune high cred eu ca in momentul de fata ar fi mult mai tentanta decat un razboi cu ungurii. Cel putin pt mine asa e. Central Hungary e doar o regiune simbolica si da, mi-ar place sa o cucerim candva... insa daca as avea de ales cu siguranta as opta pt inceputul unei campanii de obtinere de regiune high.
E intr-adevar vorba de national goals... si de asta eu cred ca obiectivul nostru national ar trebui sa fie sa devenim mai puternici, nu doar sa ne hartuim cu ungurii in speranta unui BB aparut cine stie de unde.
rizsa
@Mynsc: Fara baby-boom nu se poate. Nu avem cu ce ajunge in Asia si nici cu ce sa tinem regiunile odata luate. De-aia baby-boom-ul e pe primul loc.
"Nobody joins this game for some high resources regions on the other side of the world, situated in provinces with names nobody except the natives have ever heard about."
I did.
DIPLOMACY = saying ''cute dog, good boy'' until you grab a stone
Historically speaking, the "older" countries have following layers:
- people from other games who were told about this one by their co-players (this is actually the first time i was invited, that time by a Romanian player)
- as more people played, their told their friends/work collegues (this is the second time i heard about it, also by a Romanian player)
- when blogers found the game, they moved part of their activities here
- after the war module, wars started to draw players (this is the third time i heard about the game, this time from a Hungarian friend)
- the real promotions began (some concentrating on the game, some on RL issues), culminating with the Hungarian baby boom (i heard the 4th time here, and finally registered)
While i do agree that nowadays the mass plays the game for RL reasons, most of the "elite" does not.
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-part-1-new-world-famous-people-1407592/1/all#commentsall">http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-par[..]tsall
I do agree with what clawy and Mynsc are saying. While we do need wars that are based on RL reasons in order to get new babies, we also need strategic wars that will keep the "elite" players in the game. The art will be to balance the two types of goals.
Great article!
@gyika+Zoli+clawy
Va dedic ultimul meu strigat!
🙂
Vand casa Q1 cu 2 gold!
Too long & very very boring.
Древние слоники смотрели мультики. Мультики тоже были старенькими.